Give students English as a choice

By P. GUNASEGARAM

If Malaysians can get cheap education at school level in Malay, Chinese and Tamil, why not include English in the list.

Whichever way one looks at it, it is obvious that the decision to revert to Malay, Chinese and Tamil for the teaching of science and maths from 2012, has been politically motivated, with an eye on the next general election.

When the major government parties and those in opposition are united in their stance that maths and science should be taught in the mother tongues of students, what choice has the Government but give that back to them, irrespective of whether it may harm the students and the country in the long term.

Sometimes one wishes that all Cabinet members sent their children to national schools or were required to do so.

In that way, they would be forced to make the best decisions because they want the best for their own children, and therefore be less influenced by political considerations.

Then they would have considered other solutions to satisfy all groups in the country and which would have been perfectly workable. One such solution is simply to give choice to parents and pupils.

If parents wanted science and maths to be taught in English to their children, let them do so affordably by allowing these in national schools. That’s not as difficult or as impractical as it sounds, as we shall explain.

One of the major arguments for teaching science and maths in Malay and the vernacular languages is that these subjects are learned more easily if they are taught in the mother tongue.

The Education Ministry and advocates of rolling back the teaching of science and maths in English should have taken the trouble to establish what percentage of Malaysian households consider English as virtually their mother tongue and use it as the primary language of communication between household members. I suspect the numbers are large.

When then Prime Minister Datuk Seri (now Tun) Dr Mahathir Mohamad announced his intention to resign at an Umno meeting in 2002, then Trade and Industry Minister Datuk Seri (now Tan Sri) Rafidah Aziz rushed up to him and asked, in English, “Why?”

It was Mahathir, a year later, who made the decision to go back to English for science and maths after having overseen the switch to Malay first as Education Minister and then Prime Minister, virtually admitting his mistake of carrying the language policy too far.

Every business meeting I have attended for many years is in English, I speak in English much more than I speak in any other language to my friends – of all races. The language I use with my children is English and my children speak with all their cousins in English.

This is not to say that other languages are not important but only to say that English is important – to a whole lot of people from all races in the country.

And English is also important, as everybody admits, for the overall development of the country and to be clued into what happens around the world.

Right now, and for the last six years, science and maths have been taught in English. Despite everything that the Government says, it is inevitable that after six years, at least half of these teachers will have developed some capability to teach in English.

If they have not, these teachers must be purged from the education system and be replaced with others because six years is long enough.

Since there are two clear years and six months to the implementation of the new policy in 2012, there is actually plenty of time to iron out any difficulties and anticipate the problems that might arise.

Parents should be required to register their children for schools when the children reach the age of four or five. At that time, they can also be required to state their preferred choice of language for science and maths.

And then they can be allocated to schools according to the medium of instruction.

So two to three years before the students are enrolled in school, the education ministry will have a clear indication of how many students want to be educated in the various languages and simply make the appropriate provisions.

The numbers are not likely to vary substantially year-to-year since such long-term decisions are not typically changed at the drop of a hat.

Then, with all the teachers they already have in stock who can teach science and maths in English, and those they can train, it really should be a cinch to synchronise the manpower accordingly and satisfy all sectors of the population.

It is important to remember that only the very rich and influential can get their children educated in English at the moment.

Even private Malaysian schools are obliged to follow the Malay, Chinese or Tamil mediums of instruction, with no provision for English.

The only ones allowed an English medium are the international schools. Many Malaysians, who no doubt include politicians who support the recent reversal, have used their influence to send their children there, but that avenue is firmly shut to the very vast majority of Malaysians.

There is choice only if there is a viable alternative, and that is to give affordable English education, at least for science and maths, to those who want it in national schools or schools which are about as cheap as that.

Here is an extract from a profile of a prominent former politician and current businessman on his website: “Being a youth of the 40s, during a period when the British Colonial Policy encouraged Malays to attend Malay schools, when Malay parents worried about the possible influence of an English education on their children’s religious faith and cultural identity, Daim and his parents were able to transcend these limitations.

“In fact, his broad-minded parents enrolled all their children at English-medium schools as they did not want their children to become ‘better farmers and fishermen’.” That person in question is of course former finance minister Tun Daim Zainuddin, now by some accounts a billionaire businessman. You can read the full profile at http://daimzainuddin.com/TunDaimProfile.htm.

Should we not give that same opportunity to everyone in Malaysia if they wanted to have it, instead of just the elite and the rich?

Really, it is still not too late. The new policy comes into effect only in 2012, plenty of time to give choices to everyone. When the Government does not know what is best, or is unable to give it, choice is simply preferable.

- THE STAR

Lethal gas

By MICHAEL CHEANG

If you truly want to be a greenie, you should reconsider buying that flat screen TV.

Next time you turn on that shiny new flat screen plasma television of yours, think about this – that very TV may have contributed to global warming, and helped make the Earth’s atmosphere a little warmer for the rest of us.

This is because the manufacturing of plasma televisions includes the usage of a gas called nitrogen triflouride (NF3), a greenhouse gas so potent that it is 17,000 times more lethal as a global warming agent than an equivalent mass of carbon dioxide (CO2). In layman’s terms, NF3 is 17,000 better at warming the Earth’s atmosphere than CO2.

NF3 is one of the gases used when manufacturing liquid crystal flat-panel displays, thin-film photovoltaic cells and microcircuits. Which basically means that it’s not just TVs that use NF3 – it’s used also in making semiconductors, monitors, computer microchips, and ironically enough considering the “green-ness” of the technology, solar thin-film photovoltaics used to convert sunlight into electricity.

Even more ironically, NF3 was first used as an alternative to perfluorocarbons, another potent greenhouse gas. At the time, it was believed that the amount of NF3 used in the process was too miniscule to matter. It was even considered so insignificant that it wasn’t even included in the 1997 Kyoto Protocol – an agreement signed by 182 countries to reduce greenhouse gases.

However, a team of scientists at the Scripps Institution of Oceanography at the University of California San Diego discovered last year that NF3 is at least four times more prevalent in the atmosphere than originally expected.

The team’s results were published in October in Geophysical Research Letters, a journal of the American Geophysical Union. Led by Scripps geochemistry professor Ray Weiss and Jens Muehle, they made the first atmospheric measurements of NF3 by analysing air samples gathered over the past 30 years, and found that there were about 4,200 tonnes of the gas in the atmosphere in 2006 as opposed to the previous estimate of 1,200 tonnes. In 2008, this amount was 5,400 tonnes, which means the quantity of the gas has been increasing about 11% annually.

In short, what was previously considered to be an insignificant greenhouse gas has been quietly increasing its presence, largely in part to the increasing demand for plasma TVs and other electronics that use NF3 in their manufacturing process.

In a study published last June in Geophysical Research Letters, atmospheric chemists Michael J. Prather and Juno Hsu of University of California Irvine called NF3 the “missing greenhouse gas”, and said that the market for NF3 has exploded recently with the increase in demand for flat-panel displays.

The gas is also an extremely long-living gas that can take years, maybe centuries, to eradicate from the atmosphere. So even though only a small amount of the gas is released into the atmosphere, it may still add up into one big problem eventually, especially with the increase in demand for plasma products such as TVs, monitors and even mp3 players.

However, that doesn’t mean that one should throw out that brand new TV or stop buying them altogether. While the dangers of the gas have finally been highlighted, there is still research to be done to determine just how much damage it is causing to the atmosphere.

Already, steps have recently been made to rectify the NF3 oversight. Scientists all over the world have recommended that the gas be added to the Kyoto Protocol and just last month, the US Congress passed a climate change and energy bill that includes NF3 in the list of greenhouse gases, alongside sulphur hexafluoride, perfluorocarbons, and hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs).

Also in June, the world’s first NF3-free thin-film solar module factory was launched in Germany by a company called Malibu. The factory is said to have completely eradicated the use of NF3 from the manufacturing process.

While such measures should be hailed as steps in the right direction, it remains to be seen if the rest of the world recognises the global warming threat of NF3, and acts accordingly before it’s too late.

- THE STAR

Influenza A (H1N1) - Better safe than sorry

By CHOI TUCK WO

Students returning from abroad for the holidays should self-quarantine.

The balik kampung exodus has started.

No, this is not the traditional Hari Raya festive rush. Rather, it’s the great summer holiday getaway as Malaysian students in Britain head home to be with their families.

With the term break in full swing, there’s never been a better time to hop over to Europe for a short vacation before returning to Malaysia.

For the moment, the economic squeeze seems to have taken a back seat. After all, nothing beats going back to the warmth and love of parents. With reports of swine flu escalating to more than 4,300 cases in Britain, there’s all the more reason to leave the worries behind.

Then again, those arriving at KLIA might have been a little taken aback at the sight of intensive health screenings at the airport to curb the spread of influenza A (H1N1).

But the inconvenience to travellers is understandable. The rise in the number of imported cases involving those returning from overseas makes for grim reading.

Hence, the health authorities’ call to students travelling back from the United States, Britain, Australia and the Philippines to practise self-quarantine for seven days is to be commended.

As the total number of cases climbed to more than 120 in Malaysia, it’s high time those returning home limit their contact with others as a precautionary measure.

Both the Malaysian Students Department (MSD) in London and the United Kingdom & Eire Council (Ukec) for Malaysian Students have issued travel advisories for students to take the necessary precautions before travelling home.

As Ukec chairman Amir Fareed Abdul Rahim aptly puts it: “It’s better to be safe than sorry.”

He estimated that at least 2,000 out of the 11,000 Malaysian students in Britain had started returning to Malaysia for their summer holidays over the last two weeks.

“We expect the trend to continue until the first week of July,” he said, adding many of them usually travelled to Europe before heading home.

He said those returning might be unwittingly carrying the virus either through their travels in Europe or having come in contact with an infected person.

Whatever the scenario, he said that they don’t want to be caught in a situation where they could be guilty of helping to spread the virus in Malaysia.

“Our advice is that you must make sure you’re in good health before catching the flight home.

“Should you have high fever and flu-like symptoms, go to the nearest NHS for a full check-up,” he said, adding that he took a friend to University College London Hospital last weekend when she felt unwell.

Amir said his friend was screened and found to be suffering from a normal flu.

More importantly, the student had attained peace of mind when she travelled home to be with her family.

No solution in sight

By ZAINAH ANWAR

A bold attempt to resolve a protracted problem has yet again revealed the rifts among Malaysians in matters of religion.

The ongoing debate over the right of a convert to Islam to unilaterally convert his underage children underscores the importance of determining the public role of religion in a plural society like Malaysia.

The Cabinet recently made a courageous policy decision that when one party to a marriage converts to Islam, the minor children should be raised in the religion agreed upon by the parents at the time of marriage. This decisiveness will help to resolve an area of conflict over competing claims and interests that neither the individuals nor the courts have been able to resolve satisfactorily.

However, what was a bold attempt to resolve a protracted problem has yet again revealed the rifts among Malaysians in matters of religion. While the Cabinet decision was welcomed by non-Muslims, the Bar Council, the inter-faith Consultative Council (MCCBCHST), women’s and human rights groups and segments of the Muslim community, the advocates of Islamic state and syariah rule have opposed the decision.

Some of the Islamists felt that the issue was already decided by the December 2007 Federal Court decision, which ruled that only one parent’s consent was needed for the conversion of minor children. But in effect, this decision did not settle the matter as it did not address several questions of law.

The Court ignored Schedule 11 in the Consti­tution on interpretation which provides that “words in the singular include the plural, and words in the plural include the singular”. Thus the right of the “parent” to decide on the religion of children below 18 (Article 12 (4) ) should be read as the right of both parents.

Article 12 (4) must also be read with Article 8 (2), which prohibits discrimination on the basis of religion, race, descent, place of birth or gender. Read together with the Guardian­ship of Infants Act, which recognises that both parents have equal right of guardianship to their children, a persuasive argument can be made that the consent of both parents is needed to change the religion of the children.

The Federal Court judgment was criticised for its failure to read laws holistically and the confusion it caused over jurisdiction. Even though it ruled that civil marriages could be dissolved only by the High Court, even if one party had converted to Islam, it also held that converts could go to the Syariah Court for relief. But any judgment from the Syariah Court has no effect on the High Court.

These issues and other constitutional matters on jurisdiction and conflict of law between civil and syariah will now be heard in an appeal before the Federal Court.

Think of the children

Another earlier Court decision awarding custody to the Hindu mother, while recognising the right of the father to convert the children to Islam, also left an untenable situation in real life. How do you stop exposing the child to the practice and teachings of the religion of his custodian who is his daily caregiver and protector?

What if custody is with the convert Muslim parent: Is it realistic to expect the Muslim parent to ensure that the child is brought up in the religion at the time of marriage? Should the Court be making orders that cannot be implemented in practice?

Perhaps the more important question to answer is what is in the best interest of the child. If the court decides that custody must be with the mother, then it is only realistic that the child can be brought up in the religion of the mother. To decide that the child must be converted to Islam and brought up as a Muslim, no matter what, does not serve the best interest of the child, nor reflect Islamic juristic principles on conversion and profession of faith among minors.

As many Muslim scholars have asserted, it is not necessary to convert children to Islam as they bear no responsibility for their sins or rewards until they are of sound mind.

Also, the Administration of Islamic Law Act states that for a valid conversion to Islam, the person must utter in reasonably intelligible Arabic the two clauses of affirmation of faith, and must be aware that the two clauses mean “I bear witness that there is no God but Allah and I bear witness that the Prophet Muhammad s.a.w. is the Messenger of Allah”. These two clauses must be uttered on his or her own free will. This means that for children under 18, a parent can only give consent to the conversion, and not convert them on their behalf.

What is clear is that at all levels, be it Consti­tutional, Islamic juristic principles, and lived realities, the solution to the conundrum can be found. But politics, ideology, and confusion between personal faith and public policy got in the way.

When conflicts arising out of conversion, freedom of religion, moral policing, women’s rights, and human rights are viewed only through the religious prism and therefore must be decided according to syariah law, it makes the search for solutions even more complicated.

Far too often, the argument that syariah principles represent “the will and command of God” has instilled fear and silenced discussion and debate.

In Malaysia, this narrow ideological approach is now being supported by a new interpretative trend urging the Courts to read Article 3(1) of the Federal Constitution, which states that Islam is the religion of the Federation, to mean that all laws must conform to syariah principles.

Even though Article 3(4) states that nothing in Article 3(1) derogates from any other provision of the Constitution, arguments are now being made in court to give Article 3(1) an expanded meaning without considering other Constitutional provisions that limit syariah jurisdiction, and in particular Article 4(1) which recognises the Constitution as the supreme law of the land.

This view is also propagated in public forums and lectures led by Islamic state ideologues. There are even those who publicly say the Constitution only applies to non-Muslims, while Muslims of this land are governed by syariah law.

Law reform needed

The Cabinet has displayed the political will to find a solution to the endless contestations arising from conversions. Given the public outcry and heart-wrenching distress caused to parents and children, what is urgently needed now is immediate law reform to restore the law to the status quo before these confusing and conflicting judgments were made.

There must be clarity in law and interpretation that non-Muslims should not be subjected to syariah jurisdiction, a child’s religion can only be changed with the consent of both parents, and that all matters pertaining to a civil marriage must be resolved in the civil court under civil law, even if one party has converted to Islam.

In the long run, what is perhaps needed is the submission of a White Paper to Parlia­ment that clearly addresses all the problems, complexities and competing interests on matters involving religion. The Government can then present its long-term solutions for debate on the proper role of religion in public life and as a source of public law and policy, and the framework and principles to be used to address the areas of conflict.

The renowned Sudanese legal scholar, Abdullahi An-Na’im, advocates that the use of syariah rules and principles to make laws must pass the test of “civic reason” and be subject to safeguards within the framework of constitutionalism, human rights and citizenship.

Similar frameworks are also advocated by other Muslim scholars, groups working on women’s rights in Islam, and by the newly launched Musawah, the Global Movement for Equality and Justice in the Muslim Family.

What this means is that there is a place for religion in public law and policy. But this right can only be realised within the framework of constitutional and democratic governance at home and international law abroad.

The challenge, as posed by An-Na’im, is for the advocates of Islamic laws and policies to support their proposals in free and open public debate by reasons that are accessible and convincing to citizens, regardless of their religious or other beliefs.

And those who disagree must also enjoy the public space to present their counter proposals on an equal footing, whether their arguments are based on a different set of syariah principles or from other religious, Constitutional or human rights perspectives.

In Malaysia, the public space for debate on matters of religion is expanding. The search for just solutions can only take place if we as citizens protect this space and consider the possibilities of equality and justice from multiple perspectives – religious, international human rights, constitutional and fundamental rights guarantees, and our lived realities. The use of syariah arguments for public law and policy must be grounded in the realities of modern day life in a democratic constitutional state, and a world linked by international law.

Commentary - To ASTRO or not to ASTRO?

By AZIZ HASSAN

A simple question no doubt but which answer you agree with depends on how you evaluate things in life. Is the Astro pay-to-view television a luxury or a necessity that should not be denied the poor?

In the books of the Welfare Services Department it's a luxury someone on aid from it should not be having. In fact the department goes a step further by including free TV in its list of "cannot haves". Understandably some people disagree and are unhappy that the department has stopped its financial aid to those in need all because of a TV set or what appears on its screen.

The latter have a surprise sympathiser in Pahang Mentri Besar Adnan Yaakob who thinks that not being allowed to watch Astro equates to not being allowed to watch TV. By Adnan's reckoning this is rubbish thinking. You may or may not agree with him. I don't but what I do agree with is Adnan's thinking that the minimum monthly financial aid to those in need should be a minimum RM500. To try and get this going Adnan said he was going to write to the prime minister.

To give someone RM150 or RM200 a month in aid is simply ridiculous -- and we are talking year 2009 here.

Back to TV. According to Wikipedia, Astro, which was launched in 1996, had 2.4 million subscribers by June last year and that meant 43% of total TV sets in Malaysia. By now the number of subscribers should be at least 2.5 million. Considering that the packages can be as low as RM37.95 per month and as high as RM75.95 plus everything else you have to pay, would you say Astro is a luxury or a necessity?

Looking at the penetration so far and the start-up cost required of a subscriber, I would say it's a semi-luxury a person receiving aid will have a lot of explaining to do if he is to continue to be assisted. That or he should be satisfied with free TV like TV3, TV9, TV7, 8TV and TV1 and 2. Enough channels to keep company those in aid who have to stay at home due to physical handicaps. Unless of course that person can show proof that his Astro is being financed by friends or relatives. Which means that the department should look at this issue on a case-by-case basis.

The thing about people is that not everyone's honest, especially when it concerns money. I mean look at some of the squatter houses -- cars and yes Astro TV. Talk to them whenever there's a price increase for something and they all cry foul to ask how the government could allow this to happen to the "under-class" like them.

I knew of an operator of an eating place who lived as a squatter but rented out her low-cost flat. When I was in ITM Shah Alam (now UiTM) 30 plus years ago, some of the kids who could afford cars and motorcycles were happily receiving scholarships! Those who knew them said many were children of the rich, particularly from the east coast, who qualified for the aid because they simply under-declared their parents' income.

But it's been a week of free (positive) publicity for Astro...

http://azizhassan.blogspot.com

Beware Conficker worm come April 1

In an event that hits the computer world only once every few years, security experts are racing against time to mitigate the impact of a bit of malware which is set to wreak havoc on a hard-coded date. As is often the case, that date is April 1.

Malware creators love to target April Fool's Day with their wares, and the latest worm, called Conficker C, could be one of the most damaging attacks we've seen in years.

Conficker first bubbled up in late 2008 and began making headlines in January as known infections topped 9 million computers. Now in its third variant, Conficker C, the worm has grown incredibly complicated, powerful, and virulent... though no one is quite sure exactly what it will do when D-Day arrives.

Thanks in part to a quarter-million-dollar bounty on the head of the writer of the worm, offered by Microsoft, security researchers are aggressively digging into the worm's code as they attempt to engineer a cure or find the writer before the deadline. What's known so far is that on April 1, all infected computers will come under the control of a master machine located somewhere across the web, at which point anything's possible. Will the zombie machines become denial of service attack pawns, steal personal information, wipe hard drives, or simply manifest more traditional malware pop-ups and extortion-like come-ons designed to sell you phony security software? No one knows.

Conficker is clever in the way it hides its tracks because it uses an enormous number of URLs to communicate with HQ. The first version of Conficker used just 250 addresses each day -- which security researchers and ICANN simply bought and/or disabled -- but Conficker C will up the ante to 50,000 addresses a day when it goes active, a number which simply can't be tracked and disabled by hand.

At this point, you should be extra vigilant about protecting your PC: Patch Windows completely through Windows Update and update your anti-malware software as well. Make sure your antivirus software is actually running too, as Conficker may have disabled it.

http://tech.yahoo.com

Worry about the economy

It’s irrational for our politicians to be more preoccupied with fighting for power rather than fighting to stave off the financial tsunami and saving the jobs of Malaysians.

The political tsunami that swept Malay­sia is already a year old although the manner in which our politicians are going for each other’s throats may suggest otherwise. But it is the financial tsunami that we should be worried about.

The reality is, no one can answer how long the global economic crisis will last and how bad it will be.

Several countries, like Latvia, have slipped into depression, resulting in social unrest.

Some European leaders have admitted they do not know what to do, saying there’s no precedent or textbook formulas for them to rely on to tackle the problems.

In the United Kingdom, only one bank has not been nationalised or rescued by the government. That’s how bad the situation is now.

The United States, the world’s largest market, has been badly hit, resulting in an unemployment rate of 8.1% – the highest in 25 years with 651,000 jobs lost last month alone.

In China, especially in Guangdong, thousands of factories, which relied mostly on the American market, have shut down, resulting in millions losing their jobs.

Last week, Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao said that this year would be the country’s most difficult year in this century.

He has declared an annual growth rate of 8%, with analysts saying that anything less than that could lead to political problems.

As for Singapore, the country’s benchmark stock index may fall about 20% more as the city-state sinks deeper into recession.

In Malaysia, the economic tsunami has yet to affect us but the sign of a deteriorating economy is showing.

We will not escape the impact of the global financial crisis although the authorities have refuted claims that the country is facing a recession.

Malaysia’s economy, which is heavily dependent on manufacturing, grew by a mere 0.1% in the last three months of 2008. This took annual growth to 4.6%, below official targets.

The second stimulus plan, in which the Government is spending another RM10bil, has been tabled in Parliament to revive the economy. This takes it to a total of RM17bil.

For Malaysians, especially in the private sector, it means re-looking their working patterns. By now, the orders are already out – no more new staff, no extension for staff reaching retirement age unless absolutely necessary, cut on business trips and, for sure, no bonuses.

Employers are scrutinising their operating expenditures, looking hard to find items that can save their companies money during this doom-laden period.

As with any economies, Malaysia is no different. The brunt of the layoffs would be on workers in factories, the retail sector, construction and hotels. That means it would hit the less educated ones the most.

At the Asia News Network meeting in Bangkok last week, many newspaper editors expressed their bewilderment at the excessive politicking in Malaysia.

Many of these media practitioners have friends and relatives in Malaysia and they voiced their concern at what is happening in our country, where our leaders seem more preoccupied with fighting for power instead of fighting to keep jobs for Malaysians.

In the assessment of their companies performances, whether in print or multi-media, the results will be the same – drops in revenue and circulation – as they grapple with the credit crunch.

The priorities of our politicians, however, are mixed up, and more Malaysians are becoming frustrated and even alienated at what they see as the failure of leaders, regardless of their political beliefs, to face the financial tsunami that is coming our way.

It is time that Malaysians insist that our politicians stop their antics, call a truce and get on with the real job of governing the states and the country.

- THE STAR

Commentary - Demonstration against the use of English in the teaching of Mathematics and Science

Yesterday's demonstration against the use of English in the teaching of Mathematics and Science has been described as an exercise in futility, since the Government has yet to make a decision on the matter.

But that assumes the protest masterminds did not realise this and were merely engaging in futile actions.

The more likely prospect is scarier: that they were deliberately pressuring or intimidating the Government into making the decision they want.

Clearly, such demonstrations that disturb the peace and infringe on the public interest are anti-social.

If the Govern­ment gives in to their demands now, other groups with other causes will be encouraged to take to the streets to force their preference on the nation.

In a mature and reasonable society, there is no substitute for rational discourse where differences of opinion exist. But the proper channels for registering disagreement are nullified and threatened by rowdy protests.

The standard of English for the vast majority of Malaysians has fallen over the years, so there is simply no case against improving it.

The realities of an increasingly competitive world demand that we raise our standard of the foremost international language.

Even the majority of students at school prefer to use English in these two subjects. Advocates of English should also speak out more.

If reason and the popular will mean anything to these protesters, they should change their views forthwith.

Perhaps more should be done to ensure teachers are better prepared to manage these subjects in English.

But the choice of Mathematics and Science, which require little prose to teach and which already possess many terms in English, shows the concessions the Government has already made.

It may seem “easier” for people whose native tongue is not English to reject having to deal with the language altogether. But that is the way for people with little inkling of what the future holds.

For now, such protest moments give political opportunists an opening to exploit.

The authorities in turn need to be firm, and enforce the law professionally against those who would flout it, without any recourse to senseless brutality.

- THE STAR

What the people of Perak says about the crisis?

If the Barisan Nasional and the Perak royal household had any lingering doubts about negative public sentiment towards the change of the state government, here is a message: doubt no more.

A survey of registered voters in Perak on Feb 8 showed that:

• 74 per cent of the respondents feel that the state assembly should have been dissolved after the defection of the three Pakatan Rakyat lawmakers

• 76 per cent of the respondents felt that the "people, through elections, should decide on who forms the government"

• 62 per cent of the respondents felt that the "role of the palace in this decision" means it does not recognise the will of the people

• 66 per cent of the respondents do not accept state governments formed through the defection of state assemblymen

• 59 per cent of the respondents feel that the political crisis in Perak would decrease support for Barisan Nasional.

Taken together, the poll by the Merdeka Centre suggests that Datuk Dr Zambry Abdul Kadir and the BN may occupy the seat of government but a significant number of Perakians may not accept their legitimacy to hold power.

The political crisis unfolded in Perak when three Pakatan Rakyat legislators became independents and said that they would back the BN.

This wiped away the three-seat majority which enabled Pakatan Rakyat to rule the state since March last year.

After interviewing the three and the 28 BN representatives, Sultan Azlan Shah decided that BN had the majority in the state assembly. This was a controversial decision given that Datuk Seri Nizar Jamaluddin and Pakatan Rakyat felt that the correct decision should have been for the Ruler to allow for the state assembly to be dissolved for fresh elections.

There is a roiling debate even among lawyers on the Sultan's decision, with the majority saying that he should have either agreed to the dissolution of the House or held off making any decision until a vote of no confidence against Nizar was taken in the assembly.

The survey findings indicate that many Perak voters also feel that the Ruler may have erred.

Some 507 registered voters were interviewed by telephone and the sampling was done randomly. The margin of error was about 4.5 per cent.

- MALAYSIAN INSIDER